If you're a financial freak try online forex, forex online has never been easier; experience forex trading at the leading forex broker offering forex managed accounts offering you the opportunity to trade forex online with state of the art real trading conditions.

Webmaster or site owner? Join the leading forex affiliate program and start earning from your advertising space.

Going on the Offensive: let’s not allow the pro-police staters to set narrative parameters

Since the day of the Connecticut shooting, I’ve tried to anticipate every cynical move progressives would likely make to try to capitalize on this (not new) “crisis”. Because I knew they would — and indeed they have, going so far as to pretend that their calls for less freedom and, as a consequence, a larger police state, is a “moral imperative.” But having gone on the offensive myself, I can now assert — based on the many many attempts that have been made to try to mischaracterize my arguments — that this is precisely the best tack to take. Because their inability to control the narrative is what weakens the left the most — and frankly, they don’t know how to handle it, save for the predictable lies, spins, and sneers that they hope will shame their intellectual opponents into silence.

In addition to the gunman, blood is on the hands of members of Congress and the Connecticut legislators who voted to ban guns from all schools in Connecticut (and most other states). They are the ones who made it illegal to defend oneself with a gun in a school when that is the only effective way of resisting a gunman.

What a lethal, false security are the “gun-free zone” laws. Virtually all mass murders in the past 20 years have occurred in gun-free zones. The two people murdered several days earlier in a shopping center in Oregon were also killed in a gun-free zone.

Hopefully, the Connecticut tragedy will be the tipping point after which a rising chorus of Americans will demand elimination of the gun-free zone laws that are in fact criminal-safe zones.

One measure of insanity is repeating the same failure time after time, hoping that the next time the failure will turn out to be a success. Gun-free zones are a lethal insanity.

Israel finally came to grips with this in the early 1970s and have decisively stopped these attacks after a busload of children was massacred by Muslim terrorists. When I was there in the late 1990s, if you saw a busload of students, you saw at least one young teacher with a machine gun protecting the groups of students.

The Israelis have decisively stopped these school-related attacks and proved they want to live. Do we?

During the decade of the Clinton ban on semiautomatic rifles (the so-called assault weapons) and high-capacity magazines, crime did not go down. Reinstating it would simply be another example of repeating the same failed policy and being surprised with the same failed result.

We must tell our elected officials that they are acting as the criminals’ friends as long as they continue to support legislation that protects only criminals, not decent people.

Oh, and we must also insist that these criminal-friendly elected officials not even try to blame gun owners and our “gun culture” for what a criminal did.

Had a few of us been available with guns at the Newtown school, most of the victims might still be alive.

[my emphasis]

Pratt strikes hard at the heart of the problem: politicians who pass feel-good legislation to show themselves “tough on guns” in order to please the modern progressive effete, most of whom have never fired a weapon nor know anything much about them.

These are the creatures first to stick their faces in front of a news camera after each new tragedy to decry the inhumanity of it all — then begin hinting that they support yet another road of “controls” that punish the law abiding and keep those determined to break the law protected from those who would naturally uphold it.

It’s despicable. It’s opportunistic. And it shows the liberal fascist impulse, which these days likes to dress itself up as a moral imperative, with the State as Godhead and themselves, by extension, its humble priesthood. By insisting that they hold the moral high ground, and then reinforcing that belief through repetition and reassurance from within the hive mind, progressives believe they can will their manufactured consensus into a kind of perceptional “truth.”

But that only works until the firm finality of reality dissipates their post-modern mirage. And it always does.

Meaning the trick is in holding them accountable for forcing us to trust in mirages in the first place.

Pratt does just that. And we should be doing so as well at every turn. It’s linguistic tipping point time. Time to strap on your cup and take the verbal fight to the sanctimonious tyrants and their legion of useful idiots.

Let’s start with suing the school district for failing to protect the children in their care. I am sure that the history of school massacres is sufficient to put the school district on notice that such a thing is possible. If schools have a duty to ensure children have adequate nutrition, I am sure they have a similar duty to protect their charges. This is not ‘blaming the victims’. It is assigning responsibility to those that claim a responsibility – when it suits them.

I have a duty to myself to self defense – I can’t abdicate that duty…but of course we are expected to – to the police that have no duty to protect me.

In addition to the gunman, blood is on the hands of members of Congress and the Connecticut legislators who voted to ban guns from all schools in Connecticut (and most other states). They are the ones who made it illegal to defend oneself with a gun in a school when that is the only effective way of resisting a gunman.

Pratt strikes hard at the heart of the problem: politicians who pass feel-good legislation to show themselves “tough on guns” in order to please the modern progressive effete, most of whom have never fired a weapon nor know anything much about them.

This sets up a false choice. Let people bring guns to school, or pass feel good but do-nothing legislation.

To say that it would be good policy to allow staff to bring guns, you would need to compare the decrease in fatalities and woundings from a mass shooter with the increase in fatalities and injuries from intentional and accidental shootings that are a result of more people with guns in schools. But the people who advocate teachers packing completely ignore this – as though it doesn’t exist. Actually, they treat it as though it doesn’t matter if you end up with more dead people because freedom.

The gun bans are also stupid. I can explain why, but I’m guessing we agree here.

There’s a 3rd option – do nothing. 40,000 people die in car crashes every year. Far less than 100 die in mass shootings. In most years, far less than 20. This isn’t a real health issue worth addressing – especially since it isn’t solvable.

And then there’s other terrible options that are now being discussed – like don’t let adults other than staff into schools.

Ever wondered why the dude in the mall only managed to kill 2? Wonder no more. A guy with a concealed carry gun and permit faced him down…
So carrying guns doesn’t make us safer, eh?

So you didn’t read the article, apparently?

But to move the discussion along, let’s assume that armed shoppers, movie goers, teachers, etc, would eliminate 100% of mass shootings. How many more accidental and intentional shootings result from orders of magnitude more guns in public places?

To say that it would be good policy to allow staff to bring guns, you would need to compare the decrease in fatalities and woundings from a mass shooter with the increase in fatalities and injuries from intentional and accidental shootings that are a result of more people with guns in schools.

Tell you what. I’ll quantify the former, you quantify the latter. And show your work.

The fact that the lefties rolled in and screeched the other day when you went on the offensive immediately tells us all we need to know. You were over the target and dishing out damage, and they knew it.

We need to stay over the target.

When I heard some people trying to advocate for gun control in the bar* the other day, I made sure to loudly state the counter-argument to tamp down on the stupid.

Slipshod, on the other hand, needs to find himself another hobby, or at least do what he’s doing here someplace else, because no one here cares what he “thinks.”

SS, that is a staggeringly weak argument. As Pablo said, currently there are thousands and thousands of CC’s (if not more) out there and there is none of the “wild west” drama that you’re imputing. What is the magic number of deaths that must be breached before someone like you says, “ok enough, let guns in gun free zones”? Does a criminal/psychopath have to kill a 100 people, before someone such as yourself, says, “Hey I think the number of “accidental” deaths would have been lower than the purposeful deaths had someone, other than the criminal/psychopath, had a gun?” 200? 1,000? No, the point is that, as the author of the article stated, no gun zones are less safe than “gun” zones. And what makes it so fucking egregiously wrong is that people are forced to be victims or less safe by bureaucrats and other cowards who are lead by emotions, rather than facts. Will there be accidental deaths in a situation such as what went down in Colorado or Connecticut, should a law abiding gun owner fought back? Maybe, but I am pretty fucking sure that the results would have been a hell of a lot better than what we had.

how about a compromise? Teachers are allowed to conceal carry if they go through some mental health checks & firearm training (I know currently you need to take an 8 hour “class” but maybe we could make that more strenuous, like maybe a class on confronting armed shooters) ~ AND. we allow the schools to post a police officer or two.
?

SS, that is a staggeringly weak argument. As Pablo said, currently there are thousands and thousands of CC’s (if not more) out there and there is none of the “wild west” drama that you’re imputing. What is the magic number of deaths that must be breached before someone like you says, “ok enough, let guns in gun free zones”?

It’s pretty simply, whatever results in a net reduction of dead and injured people. Why is this hard for you to understand? Do you have trouble with simple concepts?

To say that it would be good policy to allow staff to bring guns, you would need to compare the decrease in fatalities and woundings from a mass shooter with the increase in fatalities and injuries from intentional and accidental shootings that are a result of more people with guns in schools.

How do you intend to measure people who don’t get shot, because the shooting didn’t happen, because the little emo-bitch afraid to take the Big Sleep by his lonesome doesn’t know who in his school is carrying, (but he’s reasonably sure he remembers hearing something about how Mr. Simpson the shop teacher served during Desert Storm)?

I guarantee you most of those were criminals threatening death or bodily harm on the CCW holders that killed them. Jackhole.

Date: May 15, 2012
People Killed: 1
Circumstances: On May 15, 2012, concealed handgun permit holder Tracey Grissom,
30, allegedly shot and killed her ex-husband Hunter Daniel Grissom, 28, as he stood next
to his vehicle at the Binion Creek boat landing. Tracey Grissom told investigators that
she pulled into the parking lot to take a picture for use in a pending lawsuit and her exhusband saw her sitting in her car. According to Tracey “he gave her a mean look and an
obscene gesture.” She told investigators that she exited her vehicle and “shot him until
the gun was empty.” Deputies found Hunter Grissom lying face down next to his vehicle.
According to the Tuscaloosa County Sheriff, there has been previous domestic violence
cases involving the couple. Grissom was arrested and charged with murder.

Date: December 3, 2009
People Killed: 1
Law Enforcement Officers Killed: 1
Circumstances: On December 3, 2009, Bart Johnson shot and killed Pelham, Alabama,
police officer Philip Davis during a routine traffic stop. Officer Davis had stopped
Johnson for speeding. According to videotape from the officer’s patrol car, Davis and
Johnson spoke briefly, and Davis then went to write Johnson a ticket. Upon his return,
Johnson told Davis that his brother was a police officer. Officer Davis replied, “Why
didn’t you tell me that before? Let me have his name and number so I can tell him what
happened.” Then, “unprovoked and without a word, Johnson fired one shot, striking
Davis in the face.” Johnson fled the scene, abandoned his Acura, and attempted to break
into another vehicle. When he was noticed by someone, Johnson displayed his gun and
waved the person away. He was later picked up by his brother and surrendered to
authorities. A local pharmacist, Johnson obtained a concealed weapons permit in 2007
and renewed it in 2008 and 2009. He is charged with capital murder.

Date: July 23, 2009
People Killed: 1
Circumstances: On July 23, 2009, concealed handgun permit holder Laquintta Turk, 23,
shot and killed Rosetia Smith, 24, in a parking lot. The shooting occurred during a
confrontation involving two other women—Tiffany Allen and Lashan Catlin, both 23—
over the fact that Allen’s sister had had a baby with Catlin’s ex-high school boyfriend.
Turk, Catlin, and two other women were waiting in a car in a parking lot to confront
Allen in a pre-arranged meeting. Allen eventually arrived in a car driven by Smith
containing Smith’s three children (all under age six) and her boyfriend Cameron
Marshall. Smith then “profanely told the women to get out of their car” according to
testimony. Lashan Catlin then got out of Turk’s car and slapped Smith through her car
window. Marshall testified that he then saw Laquintta Turk’s gun go off and that he tried
to drive away, steering from the passenger seat. Turk’s shot struck and killed Rosetia
Smith, with the bullet that killed her landing at the foot of her oldest child. Turk testified
that she fired only after seeing Marshall reach under his seat, although no gun was found
in the car. During the trial, Prosecutor Mike Philpott told jurors, “This is a case about a
woman who brought a gun to a fist fight, and the tragedy that resulted.” Laquintta Turk
was convicted of reckless murder and faces up to life in prison.

Date: November 11, 2008
People Killed: 1
Circumstances: On November 11, 2008, concealed handgun permit holder Kathy Lowe
shot and killed her husband, David Lowe, in the backyard of the couple’s home. Lowe
claimed the shooting was in self-defense. L owe told investigators that her husband, a
retired District Attorney Sheriff’s investigator, was ill and not expected to live beyond a
year and that his temper had worsened as his health deteriorated. During an interrogation
the night of the shooting, Lowe told investigators that when her husband had complained
of feeling ill that night she had joked, “Are you wanting me to shoot you, David?” Her
husband then picked up one of the 20 guns the couple kept in their home and followed
her around the house, threatening to kill her, and not allowing her to leave. According to
Lowe, her husband was a “hunter and collector” who “always made sure a gun was in
reach in every room of the house.” Kathy Lowe then got a gun of her own and eventually
went out to the couple’s backyard. David Lowe followed her outside and according to
Kathy Lowe started yelling and prepared to shoot her. She shot him once in the arm and
then “blindly” shot him twice more, killing him. During the trial, prosecutors argued that
Lowe had planned to kill her husband. In support, they cited: discrepancies in her version
of events as told to law enforcement; evidence of a boyfriend; three life insurance polices
on David Lowe, one taken out a month before his death; her recent procurement of the
concealed handgun permit; the recent signing by David Lowe of a long-drafted do-not
resuscitate order; and, the fact that she had made phone calls the night of the killing, but
never called 911. In August 2010, a mistrial was declared in Lowe’s trial. A new date is
being set for her retrial.

How do you intend to measure people who don’t get shot, because the shooting didn’t happen, because the little emo-bitch afraid to take the Big Sleep by his lonesome doesn’t know who in his school is carrying, (but he’s reasonably sure he remembers hearing something about how Mr. Simpson the shop teacher served during Desert Storm)?

Precisely. This is why gun stats are skewed by nature.

You can’t quantify for the “I’d best not take the chance” factor.

And yet you can look at how many spree kills take place in gun-free zones. And recognize that advertising your vulnerabilities proudly is probably not the best way to keep yourself safe from those looking for soft targets and high death tolls.

I guarantee you most of those were criminals threatening death or bodily harm on the CCW holders that killed them. Jackhole.

Which is the entire point of carrying. Then there’s those who decided to commit murder who also happen to be CCW holders, as if they wouldn’t commit the murder if they didn’t have permission to conceal the gun.

“Yeah, I was going to commit first degree murder, but then I realized that it wouldn’t be legal to carry my gun to the scene of the crime so I just forgot about the whole thing.”

And yet you can look at how many spree kills take place in gun-free zones. And recognize that advertising your vulnerabilities proudly is probably not the best way to keep yourself safe from those looking for soft targets and high death tolls.

And you can see how many people with a concealed carry kill or injure someone.

how about a compromise? Teachers are allowed to conceal carry if they go through some mental health checks & firearm training (I know currently you need to take an 8 hour “class” but maybe we could make that more strenuous, like maybe a class on confronting armed shooters) ~ AND. we allow the schools to post a police officer or two.
?

Mental health checks? What would those entail? And how would you keep them from being politicized? As it stands, you have to answer questions about certain medications when you do your background check. I suspect schools have it in their interest not to hire mentally-ill teachers to begin with.

Teachers aren’t a special class of citizen. To earn a concealed carry permit you have to pass a basic course and have (where I am, at least), the Sheriff sign off on it. It shouldn’t be that way, but it is. I took courses in basic pistol, then I took a concealed carry course.

Perhaps you can require teachers w/ cc permits to show proficiency once a year, much like we require of police. But honestly? It’s not too high of a bar to clear once you learn about handguns and practice a few times with them at the range.

And finally, the point is not about arming teachers. The point is that the potential for their being armed teachers is a better deterrent than a sign saying bringing your stolen weapon into the mall or school will be frowned upon by that establishment.

And you can see how many people with a concealed carry kill or injure someone.

Math!

Except you’d presumably want to factor out the killing of attackers or bad guys, which your stats don’t do. And by “you’d,” I’m actually really referring to people who are interested in a genuine examination of the facts, not you you.

Except you’d presumably want to factor out the killing of attackers or bad guys, which your stats don’t do. And by “you’d,” I’m actually really referring to people who are interested in a genuine examination of the facts, not you you.

Why don’t you go look at that site and see how many of the shooting involved self defense. Because those 499 since 2007 are specifically ones that were not self defense.

This doesn’t even make sense. You don’t need to have a cc permit to own a handgun. And if you’re inclined to murder, the fact that you have a cc permit is incidental.

None of which is the point, anyway. You can’t quantify the deterrent factor. And besides, the base issue here is not about math. It’s about individual liberty, the autonomy of the individual, resisting the power of the state, and natural rights.

With liberty comes consequences, not all of them favorable. Your answer? “Look at all those unfavorable consequences! We must ban liberty!”

You can’t quantify the deterrent factor. And besides, the base issue here is not about math. It’s about individual liberty, the autonomy of the individual, resisting the power of the state, and natural rights.

Which is your fundamental point. Staff should be free to bring a gun to school even if it would end up with more people being dead because freedom.

And yet you can look at how many spree kills take place in gun-free zones. And recognize that advertising your vulnerabilities proudly is probably not the best way to keep yourself safe from those looking for soft targets and high death tolls.

This is the argument that needs to be made. Because part of the narrative that’s being pushed (with the NRA in the role of lead fall guy) is that gun nuts care more about their little hobby than about little children. “Uh oh, here go the rubes with their ‘cold, dead hands’ bullshit again”.

When the real argument against ‘gun control’ has less to with actual physical firearms as it does with wrong-headed policies regarding same. Such as ‘gun free zones’.

Why don’t you go look at that site and see how many of the shooting involved self defense. Because those 499 since 2007 are specifically ones that were not self defense.

Because it’s irrelevant (and the numbers purposely skewed, as the Loughner inclusion should make clear). Having a cc permit only means you have more firearms training and paid your big government fee to have the right to carry concealed on your person. It doesn’t mean you are more likely to murder than someone without a concealed carry permit.

And again, you can’t quantify for deterrence. But you can look for where gun crime rates are lowest and maybe extrapolate out from that useful information, though the number of variables is always trick to negotiate.

You guys have asserted that teachers with CCW permits would not kill or injure more people (intentionally or accidentally) than mass shooters.

You have purposely left out a detail: that they would not kill or injure more people intentionally or accidentally inside the schools in which they are carrying.

Add that to the deterrent factor — we’d never be able to quantify how many people decided not to chance it knowing that they weren’t going up against soft targets by law — and you have the argument pretty much right.

You just favor giving the advantage to the spree killer. Because you are staunchly pro-gun, just, you know, sensible.

You guys have asserted that teachers with CCW permits would not kill or injure more people (intentionally or accidentally) than mass shooters.

Actually, you asserted the opposite and offered a “back of the envelope” calculation as prüf, and when the rest of us laughed, you started on this prove teachers would not kill and/or injure more people than mass shooters.

VPC is not winning any awards for honesty in research, judging by their cites.

Here’s a winner:

Concealed Handgun Permit Holder: Tony Villegas
INCOMPETENT TO STAND TRIAL
Date: March 5, 2008
People Killed: 1
Circumstances: On March 5, 2008, Tony Villegas allegedly strangled Melissa Britt
Lewis after a struggle ensued in her garage. Her body was found in a canal two days later. Lewis was the best friend of Villegas’ estranged wife, and had been supportive of her efforts to end the abusive relationship with Villegas. Villegas had possessed a concealed handgun permit since 2000. Villegas was indicted on a charge of premeditated first-degree murder.

UPDATE: In May 2010 Villegas was deemed incompetent to stand trial and was
transferred to a mental health facility run by the Department of Children and Families. By law, if Villegas’ mental health does not improve in five years, the first-degree murder charge against him must be dropped. According to a news report, “The current focus on Tony’s sanity is not entirely surprising. Tony’s diary from the months leading up to Melissa’s death suggests that he was struggling to keep it together. His entries were disjointed and difficult to decipher, scribbled at random on a day planner.”

Yes. That is my fundamental point. Because freedom.
The fact that more innocent people won’t end up dead, your statistical analysis being the sophistic crap it is, is just icing on the cake.

Compared to your statistics, which are non-existant.

But you don’t need to provide statistics, because freedom to carry a gun where ever you want, including into a school, is more important. You think casualties would be lower, but even if they’re higher, that’s an unfortunate but acceptable outcome because freedom.

When people discuss the issue of school shootings, you should, by definition, not be listened to. Because you’ve stated that reducing the number of people shot is not the primary objective. The primary objective is to increase gun freedom.

“Oh. Funny. VPC counted Jared Loughner as a CCW holder, even though he didn’t have a permit.”

So VPC is yet anothera dishonest outfit trying to use tilted suasion and bad cherry picked or mischaracterized anecdotes to move the suckers overt to its point of view, and so a great big dumb sucker just used them to support a stupid argument.

Concealed Handgun Permit Holder: Name Not Provided
SUICIDE
Date: Between July 1, 2010 and June 30, 2011
People Killed: 29
Circumstances: Between July 1, 2010 and June 30, 2011, Michigan State Police report that 29 Michigan concealed handgun permit holders took their own lives. In their annual report, the Michigan State Police do not release the victim’s name, the exact date of the suicide, nor the type of weapon used in the suicide.
Source: Concealed Pistol Licensure Annual Report, July 1, 2010 to June 30, 2011, Michigan State Police, http://www.michigan.gov/documents/msp/2011_CPL_Report_376632_7.pdf.

” Because you’ve stated that reducing the number of people shot is not the primary objective. ”

Incorrect. You presume that the massacres will continue at the same rate, that some armed teachers or the possibility of such will not act as a preventative in some cases, and that accidental shootings as outlined by ‘the Slippery factor’ will then add to them.

It’s just more stupid bullshit slippery. Why the fuck can’t you seem to tell when you are full of what is obviously made up shit? Do you think you appear to be a trustworthy expert in ANYTHING? What you appear to be is a clueless smug little douchebag who thinks his hunches are facts and that anything that disagrees with them must be a lie or a delusion.

Fuck, I knew SS was a disingenuous dumbfuck, but damn he brought it to new levels. Quite a few of those CC killing innocent bystanders were actually CCs killing people they knew. if it wasn’t a gun, it would have been a knife. If not a knife, it would have been a candlestick. If not a candlestick, it would have been a letter opener. You get the picture.

The primary objective is to increase freedom. Something about giving up freedom for security. I know that is not an objective you share, though.

Concealed Handgun Permit Holder: Name Not Provided
SUICIDE
Date: Between July 1, 2009 and June 30, 2010
People Killed: 43

Circumstances: Between July 1, 2009 and June 30, 2010, Michigan State Police report that 43 Michigan concealed handgun permit holders took their own lives. In their annual report, the Michigan State Police do not release the victim’s name, the exact date of the suicide, nor the type of weapon used in the suicide.

This is on practically consecutive articles. That’s 72 of the purported 499, just on a couple of pages, that are simply suicides. I’m not going to tot up all the accidental deaths, because I don’t want to nit-pick how utterly a) careless, or b) deliberately misleading this so-called analysis is.

You presume that the massacres will continue at the same rate, that some armed teachers or the possibility of such will not act as a preventative in some cases, and that accidental shootings as outlined by ‘the Slippery factor’ will then add to them.

You can’t read. I said, for the sake of argument, that massacres drop to zero. I huge increase in the number of guns in schools will result in more people being shot. Net.

Your spreadsheets don’t trump my liberty, fascist. And if I’m going to entrust teachers with the lives of my kids, I’d prefer that they be able to protect the lives of my kids, or at least die trying.

But you don’t need to provide statistics, because freedom to carry a gun where ever you want, including into a school, is more important. You think casualties would be lower, but even if they’re higher, that’s an unfortunate but acceptable outcome because freedom.

More sophistry. You keep refusing to address what’s been said over and over here: the deterrent factor. We can’t know how many deaths were prevented by having merely the potential for armed teachers.

Also, your stats equate having a CCW with accidental or intentional deaths, without any cause. How many accidental deaths were during gun cleaning incidents? How many deaths were crimes that are in no way impacted by having a CCW? How many were suicides? How many accidental shootings occurred in public places where people were free to carry?

And honestly, a “concealed” weapon is to be brandished only in cases where a serious enough threat exists, so the likelihood of an accidental death occurring to a student in a school is vanishingly small.

When people discuss the issue of school shootings, you should, by definition, not be listened to. Because you’ve stated that reducing the number of people shot is not the primary objective. The primary objective is to increase gun freedom.

No, that’s not what I’ve stated. I’ve stated that the number of people that will be shot in schools will likely decrease, and that the deterrent makes the commission of spree killings less likely.

In addition to that, I’ve said that you can’t control all the consequences of liberty. Your solution to that is to try to ban liberty itself. Mine is to say I accept that as the price of being free.

Concealed Handgun Permit Holder: Name Not Provided
SUICIDE
Date: Between July 1, 2008 and June 30, 2009
People Killed: 28

Circumstances: Between July 1, 2008 and June 30, 2009, Michigan State Police report that 28 Michigan concealed handgun permit holders took their own lives. In their annual report, the Michigan State Police do not release the victim’s name, the exact date of the suicide, nor the type of weapon used in the suicide.

Concealed Handgun Permit Holder: Name Not Provided
SUICIDE
Date: Between July 1, 2007 and June 30, 2008
People Killed: 29

Circumstances: Between July 1, 2007 and June 30, 2008, Michigan State Police report that 29 Michigan concealed handgun permit holders took their own lives. In their annual report, the Michigan State Police do not release the victim’s name, the exact date of the suicide, nor the type of weapon used in the suicide.

You can’t read. I said, for the sake of argument, that massacres drop to zero. I huge increase in the number of guns in schools will result in more people being shot. Net.

You said.

Based on…? Suicides by CCW permit holders? Crimes committed by people who happen to have CCW permits? Accidents by CCW permit holders while cleaning guns?

Find me the rate of accidental deaths caused by concealed carry holders in public places where concealed carry was allowed. Compare that to the number of crimes that were thwarted by concealed carry owners. Then add in the deterrent factor which would naturally prevent a number of attempts before they even get started.

Otherwise, you got nothing but your bare little fascist impulses hanging out their in the wind.

Find me the rate of accidental deaths caused by concealed carry holders in public places where concealed carry was allowed. Compare that to the number of crimes that were thwarted by concealed carry owners. Then add in the deterrent factor which would naturally prevent a number of attempts before they even get started.

Tell me, does the answer even matter? If the number of people shot stayed the same or even went up a little, wouldn’t you still prefer that staff be able to carry a firearm?

“And, about 100 times, I’ve said, “Fine, lets assume the number of shootings drops to zero if staff can bring guns.” I’ve already agreed, but you won’t take yes for an answer.”

No, you just aren’t reading what he said. You are reading what you wanted him so say. Like idiots do.

“Which means, the total number of people shot might go down, it might go up, but even if it goes up, I’d still rather have staff be free to bring a gun.”

What if it does both but in different regions? What is the lesson learned then? What is the actual control variable relevant to real life situations? How can you make useful predictions without having isolated it?

Why are you trying to solve this in a purely hypothetical space? You are wasting time trying to judge the purity of motivation by some over simplified model based on flawed statistics that you made up and then borrowed from VPC that turned out to be shit. Where can this go?

The Violence Policy Center is a research-based organization in Washington, D.C., US. Its work includes lobbying the United States Congress to end non-military and non-law-enforcement ownership of handguns and to tighten the regulation of long guns.
[…]
Since the VPC has no official membership fee, it relies on donations from the public. The main donor to the VPC is the JoyceFoundation,
[…]
The overall goal of the VPC is to ban most types of firearms in the United States.

We’re talking about guns in schools. Stay on target. Come back to the light Alice.

I’ve asked for the applicable stats. Go. Fetch.

And, about 100 times, I’ve said, “Fine, lets assume the number of shootings drops to zero if staff can bring guns.” I’ve already agreed, but you won’t take yes for an answer.

Sure I will.

Now, rather than using stats skewed toward suicide or careless cleaning or commissions of murder by CCW holders, howsabout you find those stats that speak to the number of accidental deaths that occur in public places that allow concealed carry, compare those to the number of time a ccw has stopped an attack, then factor in the unquantifiable deterrent factor.

Those are the numbers your need to be comparing.

A teacher with a CCW offing himself in the faculty lounge, say, has no effect on my argument. But somehow you seem to believe it statistically bolsters yours.

As for most people being idiots, his candidate won the last election. It would be easy to agree with him but, if losing an election were all it took to convince us everyone is an idiot, we’d be libtards — and frankly, it wouldn’t matter then anyway who won or lost, we’d still think that.

It’s pretty simply, whatever results in a net reduction of dead and injured people. Why is this hard for you to understand? Do you have trouble with simple concepts?

Here’s a concept for you to chew on:

If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquillity of servitude than the animating contest of freedom—go from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains sit lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen!
-Sam Adams

In May 1974, Palestinian terrorists targeted an Israeli school in the village of Ma’alot, taking a number of students hostage. When Israeli commandos tried to free the students, the terrorists opened fire on their captives, killing 22 of them.

Fearing another attack, Israeli educators asked the military for assistance. But the IDF told them it was impractical to station troops at all schools and college campuses. So, the Israelis began training teachers, counselors, administrators and parent volunteers to carry weapons, and provide protection for their schools. While virtually no teachers carry guns in the classroom, every school soon had an armed sccurity detail, professional or volunteer. Realizing that Israeli schools were no longer a “soft” target, the terrorists began looking elsewhere. It would be more than 25 years before the jihadists would again target an Israeli school.

Tell you what, let’s do it at the local level and see what numbers pop up.

The areas that don’t do it vs. the areas that do.

I mean we already have the gun free zones not actually preventing anything and possibly incentivizing such attacks by being soft targets to worry about.

You dopes want to experiment with nationalizing things, controlling growth benefit outcomes, printing money, and raisin the tax rates to show how fearlessly “progressive” you are then experiment with this.

Because it is relevant to real life unlike your silly attempt at hinging all of this on a Kantian syllogism that itself will only have relevance if your bullshit statistics are accepted as valid, accurate, and useful

If it’s a bad idea, that Texas school district will be the first to find out, and we can rely on the media to let us know. On the other hand, if life in that Texas school district goes on as before, well,

Tell me, does the answer even matter? If the number of people shot stayed the same or even went up a little, wouldn’t you still prefer that staff be able to carry a firearm?

I take it this means we’re at that point in the sophist playbook where we’re moving beyond the statistics thing? Because now you want to focus on a hypothetical that likely will have no statistical backing, anywhere, ever?

Listen: you brought up the statistical argument, which we dutifully engaged. That is, you have introduced statistics into the mix and claimed that they should be dispositive. So I asked you to go find the relevant statistics for the argument you wanted to make. So go find the stats and make it.

My argument is clear. I don’t believe teachers with ccw permits will lead to an increase in the number of deaths; I think the potentiality of armed teachers/staff will prevent or minimize slaughters; and I don’t think ccw holders in schools put children in greater peril than they otherwise might be in. I think what puts children in peril is advertising that they are collected in one place, and that that one place is a soft target.

I also believe in liberty and the natural right to self defense.

It really isn’t that difficult. So. You wanted to do stats, do stats. Put up or admit your failures.

“McGehee says December 17, 2012 at 11:33 am
Silly palaeo, science is only valid if it serves Teh Narrative. Slippy already knows, as do we, that your proposal would run his narrative right off the cliff.”

Oops! Sorry McGee. I must have been overcome momentarily by the false consciousness implanted in me by my running dog capitalist fat-cat masters. I better drink some chive tea and listen to some sitar music and think about the hopes, needs, and struggles of the workers, my dear bloody handed brothers held in bondage to the old way.

so I’m having this discussion with Australians, and they are asserting that there are no massacres in Australia because nobody is allowed to have guns.
I have a feeling they are talking out of their asses but I don’t have any experience with Australia so it’s hard to say

Tell me, does the answer even matter? If the number of people shot stayed the same or even went up a little, wouldn’t you still prefer that staff be able to carry a firearm?

You bet it would. You happen to think that the number would go up, I believe it would go down. Let’s let a state try it and find out for sure (that’s a base tenet of Federalism, by my understanding – we don’t have to break the whole nation in order to figure out if something works or not).

Whether or not some progressive teachers decided to “accidentally” shoot themselves, each other, or some kids just to prove a point is up in the air. Let me state for the record that I wouldn’t put it past some of them.

Tell me, does the answer even matter? If the number of people shot stayed the same or even went up a little, wouldn’t you still prefer that staff be able to carry a firearm?

Way to not answer the question Jeff. Here, I’ll go first, since it’s apparently scary.

If letting staff bring guns reduces the total number of innocents shot at school then I’m all for it. If it increases the number of people shot, then I’m against it.

Now what’s your answer? Why is it so hard for you to just say out loud what you really think, which is, you’re for it, even if it resulted in more people being shot, because freedom and liberty have value.

Tell me, does the answer even matter? If the number of people shot stayed the same or even went up a little, wouldn’t you still prefer that staff be able to carry a firearm?

Care to answer this?.

Two can play hypothetical:

If the only thing standing between your kid and the whack job on the other side of a locked classroom door was your kid’s teacher, would you want that teacher armed with a handgun, or is sweet reason sufficient to save the life of your kid and his or her classmates?

Circumstances: On November 25, 2011, concealed handgun permit holder Blaine Tyler, 48, was shot and killed with his own handgun, allegedly by Toby Smith, 16, inside a Richmond gas station. Seven hours later, at 2:30 AM, Smith allegedly used Tyler’s handgun to shoot and kill Pierre Walter “Pete” Cosby, 32, during a robbery attempt as Cosby sat in his car with a woman. According to authorities, Smith and Tyee Marquel Hamiel, 16, followed Tyler into a BP gas station to rob him. Although Tyler had a permit to carry concealed, he was carrying his handgun in a holster, plainly visible. Smith grabbed the handgun from Tyler and allegedly shot him in the chest after Tyler chased him. According to authorities, “Tyler’s handgun was taken from his person, and within 30 seconds he was shot….” Tyler’s wife said that he took his gun “everywhere he went”and that he had obtained the gun afer an incident that had made him feel defenseless. “I wasn’t 100 percent comfortable with it,” Sophia Tyler stated after the shooting, “But he felt that he needed it.” Less than seven hours later, Smith used Tyler’s gun to allegedly shoot and kill Cosby in a robbery attempt. Smith faces multiple charges, including: two counts of murder in the deaths of Tyler and Cosby; robbery of Tyler; conspiracy to rob Tyler; two counts of attempted robbery; and, 11 firearm charges. Hamiel was charged with: murder in the death of Tyler; robbery; conspiracy to commit robbery; use of a firearm in a robbery; possession of a gun by a minor; use of a firearm in a murder; shooting in a building; and, possession of a firearm by a convicted felon.

Sources: “Teen faces new charges in BP shooting,” Richmond Times Dispatch, February 17, 2012; “Teen homicide suspects have criminal histories,” Richmond Times Dispatch, December 3, 2011; “Second teenarrested in South Richmond slaying; Victim shot at gas station had gun taken from him, police say”

My boldies.

I am not picking out all of the murder-suicides where the suicide is counted, nor am I contesting the 13 unintentionals. Because there ought to be consequences.

If the only thing standing between your kid and the whack job on the other side of a locked classroom door was your kid’s teacher, would you want that teacher armed with a handgun, or is sweet reason sufficient to save the life of your kid and his or her classmates?

Oh yes, in that circumstance, I’d like the teacher to be ex Polish special forces, trained in 100 ways to kill.

But since the odds of dying in a mass shooting are 0.000003%, then I’d rather there not be a loaded firearm in the classroom *all the time*, because that’s actually a much higher risk.

Way to not answer the question Jeff. Here, I’ll go first, since it’s apparently scary.

I’m sorry, did I miss the point where you brought up the relevant stats for the argument you are making?

If letting staff bring guns reduces the total number of innocents shot at school then I’m all for it. If it increases the number of people shot, then I’m against it.

Then shouldn’t you be off looking for the applicable stats? You know, to inform your pragmatism?

Now what’s your answer? Why is it so hard for you to just say out loud what you really think, which is, you’re for it, even if it resulted in more people being shot, because freedom and liberty have value.

I’m for freedom and liberty, yes. I’m for deterrence, yes. But what you seem to keep missing is that my beliefs are informed both by natural rights AND by my certainty that your hypothetical — in which we get, say, 29 accidental shooting deaths in a Connecticut elementary school by teachers with concealed weapons permits, proving that allowing teachers the opportunity to carry is worse than simply betting that the occasional spree killer will do less damage — is absurd on its face.

Now. Stop dodging me and go find the applicable statistics. Your question has been answered. Now it’s your turn to back up your own prior assertions. Hell, it’s easy. I’ve even given you the formula!

“If the only thing standing between your kid and the whack job on the other side of a locked classroom door was your kid’s teacher, would you want that teacher armed with a handgun, or is sweet reason sufficient to save the life of your kid and his or her classmates?”

But Ernst, that is a micro hypothetical and slippery is into the macros hypotheticals. He is a big picture guy, even as far as his own made up statistical estimates are concerned. He wants easy top down solutions and analysis. And Complexity is not invited to take a role in the analyses as it just muddies the waters and won’t play ball. The duly selected heads of the collective should decide in the interest of society, not easily lead unter-proles in the interest of their own (ugly, fat) children.

It’s not relevant if bringing guns into schools is a good idea even if it actually increased the number of shootings. Check. Not relevant. That’s what I thought.

Spin little sophist, spin!

I wonder what the statistical odds are of being involved in an accidental shooting in a public venue using a concealed carry piece. Much less 29 such accidental shootings. All in the same place. Each of which took someone’s life.

Probably have to break out some chained together computers to do that math.

This is all bringing back the whole discussion about how the odds were so vanishingly small that you could get killed in a terrorist attack, even post-9/11, that they were disregardable. So why even try and keep that from happening again?

Those same people are now hollering for gun control, even though 9/11 killed many more people in a couple of hours than have been killed in decades of random mass-shootemups.

in which we get, say, 29 accidental shooting deaths in a Connecticut elementary school by teachers with concealed weapons permits, proving that allowing teachers the opportunity to carry is worse than simply betting that the occasional spree killer will do less damage — is absurd on its face.

Now who’s the sophist? The question is, will the number of mass school shooting deaths and injuries (which is easily measurable) decrease more than the number of schools staff who bring a gun and intentionally or accidentally shoot someone (also very easy to measure) – nation wide.

You keep asking me to go get statistics, but you’ve indicated that whatever those statistics are, doesn’t really matter. Are you saying that if I were to find statistics that (in your opinion) indicated that there would be more deaths and injuries by bringing guns into schools than would be prevented, that you would oppose letting guns into schools?

they confiscated all the law-abiding citizens’ guns, and their home invasions and violent crime went up. However, they don’t suffer from mass shooting sprees in schools. Yet. My question is what does Australia do with its mentally ill, or how does it protect its schools?
Seems like something is missing here.

Slipshod, don’t forget, this discussion is not about forcing all or, even any, educators to arm up. What is being talked about is ripping down the “Gun Free Zone” signs, and allowing those educators so inclined to have CCW in ALL places, even schools. Maybe require an extra stamp for schools verifying training in armed protection techniques or something.

And by the way, since when were school maintenance offices, kitchens, gymnasia and administration offices ‘classrooms’? Which isn’t, of course, to rule out the proposed smattering of teachers who choose to carry concealed self-defense weapons, but is intended to remind there are many responsible people on school campuses who will likely come to participate in stopping murderers intent on doing evil.

Missfixit: Wiki rundown here. A mass shooting in 1996 by an insane man kicked off a media campaign, and political movement to ban guns which succeeded. Murders and suicides by gun have decreased but murders and suicides overall have not as other methods now are used more. They also seem to have a Michael Mann type researcher doing studies that are publicized.

‘Answer my silly Kantian syllogism that is not yet sufficiently connected to the question or the real world to persuade anyone! Even if! Even if! Even if! Let’s try to characterize your motivation instead of support the poor case that was hinged on a mixture of flawed VPC and something that was made up via hilarious manipulations of a bad estimate. ‘

“And that whatever the answer is doesn’t matter, and that letting guns into schools would (for certain) result in fewer people being shot – with nothing other than an “it will” assertion to back it up.

Which is why I keep asking, (and no one answers), “Does it matter?” If the number of people getting shot went up, would that change your mind on letting guns into schools?
I think it’s very telling that no one will address that.”

Bullshit on the first, and as for the second it has been addressed. You seem to be the only fool who thinks your question is relevant much less still in play. Your lack of any real statistics is what is telling.

I think it’s more telling that you won’t cough up data to support your arguments. It’s more of a “All we have to do is assume a can-opener” kind of thing. Assuming data exists to validate my argument, tell me how I’m wrong.

G-d is slipshod stupid. His is the stupid of someone who thinks he’s not stupid, which is the most stupid of all, because someone who knows he is stupid has the option of learning stuff and tamping down on some of the stupid.

If the number of people getting shot went up, would that change your mind on letting guns into schools?

It would matter and no one here disagrees, I bet. What we disagree on is the whole premise.

Let’s turn this around: if a jurisdiction armed teachers and the number of people shot went DOWN, would it change YOUR mind? And no pretending you know whether or not numbers would go up or down, because you don’t. If you could prove it we probably wouldn’t be discussing it. So let’s let someone prove it one way or the other and make an informed decision, as opposed to a purely emotional one.

I for one don’t answer hypothetical questions based on premises that I’m not allowed to challenge. That smacks a little of Room 101 to me.
And in that scenario I prefer not to be Winston Smith or O’Brien. I’d rather be the rat.

Here, let me try one for you.

Yes, if we ended up with hundreds of people getting shot in schools because staff were bringing guns, then yes, I think we’d have to go back to making schools a gun free zone, even if it makes them soft targets. But I think the odds of that happening are vanishingly small, and I think we would not have mass shootings at schools any more.

Now who’s the sophist? The question is, will the number of mass school shooting deaths and injuries (which is easily measurable) decrease more than the number of schools staff who bring a gun and intentionally or accidentally shoot someone (also very easy to measure) – nation wide.

To answer your question, you’re still the sophist.

This will be the fourth or fifth time I’ve asked you to go find the stats relevant to informing your hypothetical, at least as an analogue, before we take it seriously. The formula is this: accidental shootings by CCW holders in public places permitting CCW that resulted in death – number of crimes where a CCW holder stopped a potential threat – the deterrent rate for gun crime in areas with high CCW rates (available by checking crime stats for such places, and by factoring out certain variables, like, eg., that often times those who are most likely to be targeted are the ones most likely to apply for CCW, like bodega owners, people who’ve filed for restraining orders, etc.).

You keep asking me to go get statistics, but you’ve indicated that whatever those statistics are, doesn’t really matter.

No, I’ve asked you to get the statistics to show you that your hypothetical is absurd. Which is why you are avoiding bringing in the relevant statistics.

Are you saying that if I were to find statistics that (in your opinion) indicated that there would be more deaths and injuries by bringing guns into schools than would be prevented, that you would oppose letting guns into schools?

I’m saying that you can’t quantify how many deaths or injuries would be prevented, so there’s no point to your hypothetical. But if it makes you feel like you’ve accomplished something, I’ll agree that if you can find statistics that in my opinion prove that it’s more dangerous to have teachers given the option to carry a concealed weapon than it is to advertise that we’ve created sitting duck zones for our children, I’m happy to revisit the specific gun control measure we’re discussing here.

Ball’s in your court. Go grab the relevant stats, run them through the formula, and show us why we should treat your hypothetical seriously.

Okay, for the purposes of the farming optimization model we will assume that all chickens are stationary thermally neutral uniform spheres in a vaccuum. And God help the poor fucker who tries to build a henhouse based on this model.

Except yes/no hypotheticals only have value comparative math, derived from no data, that reduces down to a boolean value. Thus any potential for any real world application of the model will to put it very lightly, not be particularly robust.

Of course that sort of uselessness never stopped the global warming movement/industry/lobby from attempting to deploy it as supportive rhetoric.

Data from demonstrably non-predictive computer models shows some only little correlation with even cherry picked and massaged data is claimed to prove that the AGW theory is correct and to be useful in calculating a remedy that happens to look a lot like energy deprivation and soft socialism.

Now we are trying to use syllogism based on flawed premises to prove ill will.

I’ll agree that if you can find statistics that in my opinion prove that it’s more dangerous to have teachers given the option to carry a concealed weapon than it is to advertise that we’ve created sitting duck zones for our children, I’m happy to revisit the specific gun control measure we’re discussing here.

Progress! I’m surprised, honestly. I thought you’d die on the hill of freedom and liberty.

So let’s try it. Let’s have a handful of states allow armed teachers and see what happens. I a few years, we’ll have data on how many innocents are getting shot. If it’s super low, you’re right. If it’s kinda high relative to your odds of getting killed in a mass shooting, then I’m right.

“I’ll agree that if you can find statistics that in my opinion prove that it’s more dangerous to have teachers given the option to carry a concealed weapon than it is to advertise that we’ve created sitting duck zones for our children, I’m happy to revisit the specific gun control measure we’re discussing here. ”

->

“Progress! Progress! I’m surprised, honestly. I thought you’d die on the hill of freedom and liberty. Let’s have a handful of states allow armed teachers and see what happens. I a few years, we’ll have data on how many innocents are getting shot. If it’s super low, you’re right. If it’s kinda high relative to your odds of getting killed in a mass shooting, then I’m right. ”

Okay. Congratulations, on finally managing to reach something I said this over an hour ago at 11:30 AM.

Ok. Australian criminals/lunatics can still use guns there, or bombs, or anything really. So… have they just been lucky since the 1996 massacre? they don’t want to use bombs for massacre? massacre is suddenly no longer an enticing thought for the nutjobs? still wondering what the deal is. Because the UK still has shitloads of violent crime as well…but when was the last massacre?

So how did it feel to be on ‘the right side of history’ for a few seconds? Did your mind feel expanded or anything? Did you see an apparition of David Frum beckoning you forward? Did you smell the scent of organic conflict free coffee brewing in an expresso machine? Was Eugene V. Debbs there? Did you get a sense that there is some terrible secret about Sarah Plain’s womb that the media is hiding from you? Were there open toed wooden sandals involved? Tell us about it! :)

So let’s try it. Let’s have a handful of states allow armed teachers and see what happens. I a few years, we’ll have data on how many innocents are getting shot. If it’s super low, you’re right. If it’s kinda high relative to your odds of getting killed in a mass shooting, then I’m right.

So how did it feel to be on ‘the right side of history’ for a few seconds? Did your mind feel expanded or anything? Did you see an apparition of David Frum beckoning you forward? Did you smell the scent of organic conflict free coffee brewing in an expresso machine? Was Eugene V. Debbs there? Did you get a sense that there is some terrible secret about Sarah Plain’s womb that the media is hiding from you? Were there open toed wooden sandals involved? Tell us about it! :)

I only had a glimpse, but it looked like a glass house full of children, and outside was a pristine garden that the children were not allowed to set foot on lest they spoil it. They appeared to be all sitting quietly with a dreamy look on their faces, waiting for daddy (a skinny black fellow) to bring their bowl full of candy.

“Progress! Progress! I’m surprised, honestly. I thought you’d die on the hill of freedom and liberty. Let’s have a handful of states allow armed teachers and see what happens. I a few years, we’ll have data on how many innocents are getting shot. If it’s super low, you’re right. If it’s kinda high relative to your odds of getting killed in a mass shooting, then I’m right. ”

There is no progress, because your hypothetical is, as I said, absurd on its face. So I don’t have to die on any hill.

There are certain limitations on First Amendment rights (the common “FIRE!” in a crowded theater bit). That makes sense. Whereas asserting that disallowing one to protect oneself makes one safer? Is just so stupid it actually makes my teeth hurt.

So. Have we reached the point where slippy agrees to allow ccw carriers who wish to carry at schools to carry at schools — with perhaps a caveat that they show proficiency once a year? Then we can look at the data after some time, conclude there’s no way to know just how many deaths were prevented by the deterrent, and so keep the new status quo, allowing individual districts to decide the issue?

There are certain limitations on First Amendment rights (the common “FIRE!” in a crowded theater bit). That makes sense.

Unless there really is a fire in the theater, and then you damn well better yell fire!

Even though you’ll be responsible for the deaths of the people trampled to death, who won’t be the same people who would have died of smoke inhalation had you kept your mouth shut. So maybe you don’t want that on your conscience.

What to do, what to do?

’tis quite the conundrum, absent statistical information on theatre fires and shouting “fire!” in a theatre.

You know what you do? You stream those movies straight from pirate servers in China! Because why should you, a prosperous and well-to-do member of the haute bourgeoisie have to wait for the release date, and then have to mingle with the smelly hoi-poloi in some disgusting cineplex?

Then we can look at the data after some time, conclude there’s no way to know just how many deaths were prevented by the deterrent, and so keep the new status quo, allowing individual districts to decide the issue?

You make it sound like the number of kids killed in schools shootings from, say 2000 – 2010, is unknowable. It’s known. Make that the baseline. For the sake of argument, let’s call it 1 in 1,000,000.

Now track shootings at schools when parents and staff can bring guns. If the incidence of being shot at school by a gun, brought legally by a parent or staff, is actually 1 in 250,000, then you know you’ve increased the risk.

You make it sound like the number of kids killed in schools shootings from, say 2000 – 2010, is unknowable. It’s known.

No. I make it sound like we can’t possibly know how many would-be spree killers chose other targets because they didn’t want to risk running into an armed teacher. That’s a variable.

Now track shootings at schools when parents and staff can bring guns. If the incidence of being shot at school by a gun, brought legally by a parent or staff, is actually 1 in 250,000, then you know you’ve increased the risk.

It’s knowable.

It’s only knowable if it’s implemented, and even then, the results are going to vary by location. Also, the data must factor out any deaths of innocents caused in the act of defending them should the end result be the death of the attacker, b/c there’s no way of knowing how many more s/he may have killed had not s/he been met with armed response.

I understand the need of the emotional sect to find and string up a perpetrator – not by themselves of course, using the appropriate civilian police and when the actual perpetrator is unavailable, find some appropriate scapegoat…and if it happens to be someone or something that they hate and fear, well, never let a crisis go to waste.

That said, in the last 15 years SWAT teams have killed 47 innocent people in raids that went to the wrong address. And Cato maintains a list of Police misconduct – our government sanctioned protectors with REAL assault weapons, body armor and extensive training – that by law are not responsible for protecting us.

Hom. Od. 22. 21-26:
Then into uproar broke the wooers through the halls, as they saw the man fallen, and from their high seats they sprang, driven in fear through the hall, gazing everywhere along the well-built walls; [25] but nowhere was there a shield or mighty spear to seize.

You make it sound like the number of kids killed in schools shootings from, say 2000 – 2010, is unknowable. It’s known. Make that the baseline. For the sake of argument, let’s call it 1 in 1,000,000.
Now track shootings at schools when parents and staff can bring guns. If the incidence of being shot at school by a gun, brought legally by a parent or staff, is actually 1 in 250,000, then you know you’ve increased the risk.

Apple, orange. Orange, apple.

To say nothing of the problem of figuring out who was neither shot nor killed because the spree killer decided to take on the Quakers instead.

That said, in the last 15 years SWAT teams have killed 47 innocent people in raids that went to the wrong address

Yeah, we are fast approaching (or zoomed past) having a (unconstitutional) military policing of the citizens.

See, here’s the thing, the fascists among us won’t really be happy with just disarming the public because they know that doesn’t stop the killers. They always want increased security too. What we get is more people relying on the authorities to protect them, their own self defense being nonviable and all, and an ever increasing police presence, as the killers continue to kill.

Next thing you know we live in a police state. Slipshod would call that bad luck.

At 9:30 p.m. on Sunday, what could have been a homicidal rampage came to an abrupt halt thanks to an off-duty deputy. News 4 WOAI reports that Jesus Manuel Garcia, the alleged shooter, opened fire at China Garden restaurant in San Antonio, then proceeded to the parking lot of the Mayan Palace Theatre and shot a bystander (the bystander’s injuries don’t appear to be fatal). Garcia then entered the theatre, where an off-duty deputy ended his spree by shooting him four times. Fortunately, we’ll never know how many lives the deputy saved by having a gun in the right place at the right time.

This is the same group that tried to “prove” CCW holders in Texas were “more prone” to crime via tracking “arrests” and not convictions. Except when you looked at the details, you’d find most of them involved minor traffic violations. Plus the arrest rate for people w/o CCW permits was actually higher, but VPC somehow left that out of their spiel.

I am growing increasingly tired of MFMers referring to a .223 semiauto as an assault style weapon. They don’t call it an assault weapon, because it isn’t, but it looks scary, so they conflate assault weapon and assault style weapon.

If buttercups buzz’d after the bee
If boats were on land, churches on sea
If ponies rode men and if grass ate the cows
And cats should be chased into holes by the mouse
If the mamas sold their babies
To the Gypsies for half a crown
If summer were spring
And the other way ’round
Then all the world would be upside down!

Charles Becker (July 26, 1870 – July 30, 1915) was a Lieutenant in the New York City Police Department between the 1890s and 1910s. He is best known for being tried, convicted and executed for the murder of a Manhattan gambler, Herman Rosenthal.. After the Becker-Rosenthal trial, Charles Becker became the first American police officer to receive the death penalty for murder. The scandal that surrounded his arrest, conviction, and execution was one of the most important in Progressive Era New York City.

Helle Crafts (born Helle Lorck Nielson, July 4, 1947 – November 19, 1986) was a Danish flight attendant who was murdered by her husband, Richard Crafts, an airline pilot and special constable. Her murder is sometimes called the “Woodchipper Murder” because of the method in which Richard Crafts disposed of her body. Her death brought about the first murder conviction in the state of Connecticut in which a body was never found.[1]

Frank Joseph Coppola (February 25, 1944 – August 10, 1982), was a police officer from Portsmouth, Virginia who was convicted and sentenced to death for the 1978 capital murder of Muriel Hatchell, although he maintained his innocence until his execution.[1] According to reports,[which?] a co-conspirator with Coppola disguised herself as a flower delivery woman to enter her home, the woman pulled out a pistol from amidst the floral display which she was carrying, allowing cover for Coppola and others to rush into the home.

Michael Jerome Corbitt (March 17, 1944 – July 27, 2004) was a police chief of Willow Springs, Illinois, and an associate of Chicago Outfit mobsters such as Sal Bastone, Sam “Momo” Giancana and Antonino “Tony,” “Joe Batters” Accardo. He became a cooperating witness after being convicted of aiding in the murder of Chicagoan Diane Masters, by her husband, Alan. Corbitt has authored a book about his experiences entitled, “The Cop Who Was a Mobster.”

Sidney Dorsey (born February 23, 1940, in Atlanta, Georgia) served as sheriff of DeKalb County, Georgia from 1996 to 2000. Dorsey was the first African-American to serve as sheriff of DeKalb County and was married to Atlanta city councilwoman Sherry Dorsey (1954–2006). He was defeated in a 2000 runoff by challenger Derwin Brown, whom he had murdered shortly thereafter

Antoinette Frank (born April 30, 1971) is a former New Orleans police officer who was convicted of the robbery of a restaurant where a fellow officer worked as a security guard, and the murders of three people, including her partner on the police department, who was also a security guard at the restaurant. Frank is one of two women on Louisiana’s death row at the Louisiana Correctional Institute for Women in St. Gabriel, Louisiana.

Stephanie Ilene Lazarus is a former Los Angeles police detective who was convicted in March 2012 of the 1986 first-degree murder of her ex-boyfriend’s new wife, Sherri Rasmussen.[1] Lazarus is serving a 27-year to life sentence for the offense at the Central California Women’s Facility in Chowchilla, California. Her case made national headlines.

Michael Harold Chapel is a former Gwinnett County Georgia police officer, who was convicted in the murder of 53-year-old Emogene Thompson outside a muffler shop (demolished, now the landscaped entrance to Discover Mills) on Peachtree Industrial Blvd. in Sugar Hill, Georgia.

Drew Walter Peterson (born January 5, 1954) is a retired Bolingbrook, Illinois, police sergeant who first received national publicity in the United States in 2007, when his fourth wife Stacy disappeared. Stacy Peterson was never found, and Drew Peterson has not been charged in her case. In 2009, Drew Peterson was indicted for the murder of his third wife, Kathleen Savio (who died in 2004), and he was convicted in 2012. He is currently being held at the Will County Adult Detention Center in Joliet, Illinois.

Craig Alan Peyer (born March 16, 1950) was a rogue California Highway Patrol officer convicted of the 1986 strangulation murder of motorist Cara Knott, a student at San Diego State University.

Gerard John Schaefer (Wisconsin, March 25, 1946 – December 3, 1995) was an American serial killer from Florida. He was imprisoned in 1973 for murders he committed as a Martin County, Florida Sheriff’s deputy.

Robert Brooks – A former eastern Missouri police officer has been convicted of second-degree murder in the fatal shooting of his fiancee six years ago. The St. Louis Post-Dispatch reports that Friday’s verdict marked the second time 43-year-old Robert Brooks was convicted of the charge in Jefferson County Circuit Court. The Missouri Supreme Court threw out the earlier conviction, citing improper comments by prosecutors.
Brooks was a Calverton Park police officer when he shot 26-year-old Amanda Cates, a school resource officer at Normandy Middle School, in August 2006

Eugene P. Burrell – A onetime suburban police officer with a previous conviction for kidnapping and rape was found guilty by a jury in St. Louis on Thursday of second-degree murder.
Eugene P. Burrell, 44, claimed self-defense in the shooting of Justin Young, 29, early in the morning of Aug. 26, 2010, in the 4000 block of Maffitt Avenue.

Ron Mortensen, 31, and another off-duty officer were driving around a neighborhood east of the Las Vegas Strip harassing reputed gang members and drug dealers last December when Mortensen fired his gun out the window, killing 21-year-old Daniel Mendoza.

Login/Register

Advertisements

DHgate.com is the leading B2B online trading marketplace for china wholesale products, you can buy high quality china wholesale apparel, electronics, security cameras and other wholesale products on DHgate.com.